Ruth Bader Ginsburg Death & What it Means for SCOTUS – Viva & Barnes

This is a segment (a long one!) from the Viva Frei and Robert Barnes live stream last night. Their discussions are always informative and interesting, whether or not you agree with what they have to say.

I posted the entire live stream video last night on the General Discussion thread, along with my comments on this segment, which were:

If you never have watched these Viva Frei/Barnes Law live streams, this is a good one to watch. Barnes explains why he doesn’t back Amy Coney Barrett for the Supreme Court, and it makes sense. He says she’s strongly corporate, not strong on civil liberties, would likely be another John Roberts, and he thinks that she wouldn’t get approved by the Senate. He favors the Cuban judge from Florida, Barbara Lagoa. As he puts it, Barrett is politically favored because she was a clerk on the Supreme Court. Lagoa wasn’t.

Barnes’ main point is that it is most important to seat a 9th SC justice; the absolute most important thing is to have an appointee that is most likely to be approved by the Senate. Lagoa will be hard to go against: Latina, female, immigrant. And she is a good candidate, a daughter of working class immigrants, pro civil liberties etc.

If we only have eight Justices when the eventual election cases come to the court, it could cost Trump the Presidency.

This entry was posted in 2020 Presidential Race, Government, Law, video. Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to Ruth Bader Ginsburg Death & What it Means for SCOTUS – Viva & Barnes

  1. jeans2nd says:

    Thank you, Stella. Was too tired to check VF’s youtube last night, and this one i really wanted to hear.

    Have heard much the same about ACB, and only good about Lagoa. Being Cuban is def a big plus. All their particulars are available on SCOTUSblog, so checked there first.
    Barnes, being American, may have the better take than Canadian Frey. But one never knows!
    Sometimes an outsider has the more dispassionate and thus accurate view.

    Liked by 1 person

    • stella says:

      The entire live stream is interesting. Lots of meaty subjects this week!

      Liked by 1 person

      • jeans2nd says:

        This vid wasn’t what i expected, but was so educational am glad i listened to it.
        Barnes confirmed my hunch before listening, but for different reasons than mine.
        Learning about the SCOTUS clerk old-guys-club was revelatory. Had never heard that before; good to know.

        Hope others take the time to listen to this. Definitely worth the time.
        Frei has another vid up as well, the one about Carpe Donktum. That was was very informative, too. Had no idea Carpe was being sued.
        Only in America…

        Liked by 1 person

      • jeans2nd says:

        Forgot – would really love to hear Menagerie’s opinion re: the Democrat Catholics, as defined by Barnes. Never really thought about that.

        Liked by 1 person

        • stella says:

          I would like to know that too, although I don’t think it is as important as Barnes is making it out to be. It would, however, be a big deal in the Senate and is important for that reason.

          Liked by 1 person

        • Menagerie says:

          Haven’t watched it yet, I played outside. I have a very low opinion of Democrat Catholics, but I will have to watch to address this specifically. In my opinion and interpretation of Church Doctrine, which would make it more than my opinion, according to time held traditional theological teachings, any Catholic who votes for a Democrat is committing a mortal sin, in that they are directly contributing to the performance, funding, and availability of abortion.

          The only exception would be someone who seriously lacked understanding of that connection. In that case they would be culpable for not having a well formed conscience. No Catholic gets to define sin for themselves, indeed no true Christian should. It’s not a matter of what I think or whether I like it, it is a matter of what God said for me to do. In that light, each Catholic is responsible for informing themselves thoroughly so that they are prepared to make just and sound decisions.

          It is also our belief that contributing to another’s sin by enabling them or misleading them is a grave mortal sin. In other words, Pelosi has not only the blood of babies on her hands, but the choices of millions of women she influences.

          Liked by 3 people

          • stella says:

            Barrett is a Republican, I believe, but is reportedly a member of the group People of Praise. I know nothing about it.

            Liked by 1 person

            • Menagerie says:

              I know little about it, just that it is a charismatic movement, something some members of the Catholic Church have gravitated toward in recent years, but I have no knowledge of it.

              Not a lot of discussion about it in my parish or diocese, and I have no way to know if that is the norm, and it is kind of an outsider group. Because I have personal feelings about the movement I wouldn’t be a good source for information even if I had more.

              Liked by 1 person

          • jeans2nd says:

            This was about a Catholic judge having to recuse himself in something like a death penalty case, and if a Catholic judge had to take the Pope’s view into consideration before taking a law into consideration.
            John F. Kennedy went through this stuff as well, iirc.
            Never really thought about it, and as such have no opinion.

            Liked by 1 person

        • Menagerie says:

          I won’t get a chance to listen to it until tomorrow, but I believe this will answer your question, far better than I could. Zmirak is always a must read for me. I got familiar with him because Eric Metaxas talks about him and posts his articles a lot.

          https://humanevents.com/2019/09/19/amy-coney-barrett-is-not-a-safe-pick-for-the-supreme-court/

          Basically, what he says it boils down to leads back (again) to a Pope Francis sh!t show.

          Liked by 3 people

      • stella says:

        Did you see this one?

        Liked by 1 person

  2. stella says:

    Should note that Lagoa got 80 yes votes (15 no) in the Senate when she was appointed to the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in 2019. The Judicial Committee voted 18-4 to approve.

    This will make it more difficult to oppose her nomination to the Supreme Court.

    Amy Coney Barrett, in contrast: The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11–9 on party lines to recommend Barrett and report her nomination to the full Senate. The Senate confirmed her by a vote of 55–43.

    Liked by 2 people

  3. stella says:

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Menagerie says:

    I read some things about her before Kavanaugh was nominated that gave me pause. Some Catholics, believe it or not, have written about her unfavorably from a judicial, not religious, standpoint.

    Liked by 3 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.